2100 Southwest River Parkway Suite 100 Portland Oregon 97201 Telephone: 503.223.6663 Facsimile: 503.223.2701 DATE: May 19, 2020 TO: Ken Loffink and Jim Brick Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE Salem, Oregon, 97302 FROM: John Macklin SUBJECT: Fish Screen Waiver: Draft Mitigation Plan PROJECT: GSIW00000009 Spring Hill Pumping Plant CC: Kim Grigsby, GSI Water Solutions; Casey Storey, DEA; Kristel Griffith, Negar Niakan and Jessica Dorsey, Joint Water Commission 1. Executive Summary The Joint Water Commission (JWC) is comprised of the Cities of Hillsboro, Beaverton and Forest Grove, and the Tualatin Valley Water District, and is the primary drinking water supplier in Washington County. The JWC withdraws water from the Tualatin River at the Spring Hill Pumping Plant (SHPP), which is owned by the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). The JWC holds multiple water rights that require fish screens meeting current Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) standards. The SHPP fish screens, however, do not meet current standards. The JWC cannot replace the fish screens at the SHPP because it does not own or control the SHPP facility. As a result, JWC is applying to ODFW for a fish screen waiver, and proposes to mitigate for this by restoring fish passage at two road culverts that currently restrict fish migration on Bateman Creek, a Gales Creek tributary. An additional half-mile of stream habitat will become fully accessible to native resident fish and anadromous fish including steelhead trout and coho salmon. This mitigation project is estimated to produce more than enough salmonid fry to offset any possible losses by entrainment at the existing pumping plant fish screen. 2. Project Description and Regulatory Background The JWC diverts water from stored water and natural flow sources in the Tualatin Basin at the SHPP (Figure 1). The water is then treated and distributed throughout the JWC’s service area. The SHPP facility is part of the Bureau of Reclamation’s (BOR) Tualatin Project. The facility includes nine (9) water withdrawal pumps on the Tualatin River. The JWC diverts water using four (4) of these pumps. The fish screens at this facility, which are owned by BOR, were evaluated by the National Marine Fishery Service as part of its 2014 Biological Opinion for the operation of the Tualatin Project. NMFS did not recommend modification of the fish screens in that document. Therefore, BOR does not intend to replace them and the existing screens Appendix A
Transcript
2100 Southwest River Parkway Suite 100 Portland Oregon 97201 Telephone: 503.223.6663 Facsimile: 503.223.2701
DATE: May 19, 2020
TO: Ken Loffink and Jim Brick
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE
Salem, Oregon, 97302
FROM: John Macklin
SUBJECT: Fish Screen Waiver: Draft Mitigation Plan
PROJECT: GSIW00000009
Spring Hill Pumping Plant
CC: Kim Grigsby, GSI Water Solutions; Casey Storey, DEA; Kristel Griffith, Negar Niakan and
Jessica Dorsey, Joint Water Commission
1. Executive Summary
The Joint Water Commission (JWC) is comprised of the Cities of Hillsboro, Beaverton and Forest Grove, and the
Tualatin Valley Water District, and is the primary drinking water supplier in Washington County. The JWC
withdraws water from the Tualatin River at the Spring Hill Pumping Plant (SHPP), which is owned by the
Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). The JWC holds multiple water rights that require fish screens meeting current
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) standards. The SHPP fish screens, however, do not meet
current standards.
The JWC cannot replace the fish screens at the SHPP because it does not own or control the SHPP facility. As a
result, JWC is applying to ODFW for a fish screen waiver, and proposes to mitigate for this by restoring fish
passage at two road culverts that currently restrict fish migration on Bateman Creek, a Gales Creek tributary.
An additional half-mile of stream habitat will become fully accessible to native resident fish and anadromous
fish including steelhead trout and coho salmon. This mitigation project is estimated to produce more than
enough salmonid fry to offset any possible losses by entrainment at the existing pumping plant fish screen.
2. Project Description and Regulatory Background
The JWC diverts water from stored water and natural flow sources in the Tualatin Basin at the SHPP (Figure 1).
The water is then treated and distributed throughout the JWC’s service area.
The SHPP facility is part of the Bureau of Reclamation’s (BOR) Tualatin Project. The facility includes nine (9)
water withdrawal pumps on the Tualatin River. The JWC diverts water using four (4) of these pumps. The fish
screens at this facility, which are owned by BOR, were evaluated by the National Marine Fishery Service as part
of its 2014 Biological Opinion for the operation of the Tualatin Project. NMFS did not recommend modification
of the fish screens in that document. Therefore, BOR does not intend to replace them and the existing screens
Appendix A
DATE: May 19, 2020 FROM: John Macklin
TO: Ken Loffink and Jim Brick SUBJECT: Fish Screen Waiver: Draft Mitigation
Plan
Page 2
will remain in place for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
(ODFW) does not consider the screens to meet its current fish screen criteria.
The pumping capacity of the JWC’s portion of the SHPP is projected to be 143 cfs year-round (referred to as
the “capacity pumping rate”). The JWC holds numerous water rights that authorize the diversion of water at
the SHPP. Some of the water rights held by the JWC contain conditions that require fish screening meeting
ODFW’s current standards. Permit S-54737, which authorizes the use of up to 75 cfs from Scoggins Creek
during the non-peak season (October 1 through May 31), requires fish screens meeting current ODFW fish
screen criteria when the capacity of the SHPP is increased. In addition, Permit S-55219, which authorizes the
use of up to 30 cfs of stored water from Barney Reservoir, requires fish screening meeting current ODFW
standards or documentation that fish screening is not necessary or is exempted. Finally, the JWC has applied
for a new permit (Application #S-88506) to use up to 44 cfs from the Tualatin River during the non-peak
season. (This rate is not additive to the rate authorized under Permit S-54737; i.e. diversion under Permit S-
54737 in combination with the new permit cannot exceed 75 cfs.) If a permit is issued for this application, the
JWC anticipates that it will include a fish screen condition similar to that included in Permit S-55219. The
maximum pumping rate under the above-described water rights would be 105 cfs (from October 1 through
May 31), which referred to as the “maximum permit pumping rate.” JWC, however, anticipates diverting
water under these rights at lower than the maximum permit rate during portions of this period.
As described above, JWC does not own or control the SHPP physical facilities and is not able to alter the fish
screens there. Therefore, JWC is requesting a fish screening waiver from ODFW and is proposing fish passage
restoration at Bateman Creek as mitigation.
3. Project Impacts
Mt Hood Environmental (MHE) conducted extensive on-site studies and data analysis to assess fish
entrainment and mortality in the existing SHPP fish screens that could be caused by the diversion of water.
Findings were presented in a 2019 technical report (MHE 2019a) and conclusions were summarized in a 2019
technical memorandum (MHE 2019b). MHE calculated that the maximum number of salmonids that could be
entrained and killed in the existing screens at the maximum permit pumping rate is 6,287. (MHE also
calculated the maximum number of salmonids that could be entrained and killed in the existing screens at the
capacity pumping rate is 9,559.) These number includes coho salmon, chinook salmon, and steelhead trout. All
of these would be the fry life-stage, as the flow velocity is not sufficient to draw in larger fish.
4. Proposed Mitigation Site
JWC and David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) have collaborated with ODFW biologists to identify a location
where restoration of fish passage through a culverted road crossing can enable production and emergence of
enough salmonid fry to compensate for the maximum potential fish mortality described above.
DATE: May 19, 2020 FROM: John Macklin
TO: Ken Loffink and Jim Brick SUBJECT: Fish Screen Waiver: Draft Mitigation
Plan
Page 3
After investigating a number of potential mitigation sites at culverted road crossings in the Tualatin River
basin, Bateman Creek was identified as the best opportunity. The Bateman Creek site lies about 0.15 mile
south of State Highway 6 near milepost 41, between the towns of Glenwood and Gales Creek in Washington
County (45.62N, -123.27W W.M.) (Figure 1). The selected Bateman Creek project includes two 20% passable
culverts conveying the creek beneath two separate lightly trafficked unpaved private logging spurs. These
small access roads extend southward across Bateman Creek from a private gravel road. The culverts are
located at approximately river miles 0.15 and 0.16 (Figure 2).
The property is owned by three members of the Bateman family, who are willing to allow culvert replacement
in this stream reach. Conversations with the land owners are positive and they have verbally agreed to a
preliminary Access Agreement with the JWC. Details and formalization of that agreement are ongoing. The
JWC intends to record a permanent easement on the property to perform future maintenance.
Bateman Creek is a tributary of Gales Creek in the Coast Range foothills. Two impassable culverts downstream
of the proposed mitigation site were replaced in 2006 to restore fish passage: one on State Route 6 and one on
the main road into the Bateman property. Native resident and migratory fish known to occur in Gales Creek
and in these lower reaches include coho salmon, winter steelhead trout, resident cutthroat trout, sculpins,
brook lamprey and possibly Pacific lamprey.
The lower culvert (Culvert #1) western crossing in question consists of two 20-foot long 36-inch diameter pipes
with a small drop at the outlet (Figure 3). The south (right bank) culvert is corrugated metal pipe (CMP), but
the north (left bank) culvert was pieced together from CMP and concrete pipe sections, with a gap of several
inches between them. Part of the flow appears to be passing beneath the culvert outlet. This crossing conveys
the stream under a small, seldom used logging access route.
The eastern (middle) of the two crossings (Culvert #2) also consists of two 20-foot long, 36-inch diameter
pipes, with a drop of over one foot at the outlets (Figure 4). Both pipe outlets are concrete, but the south (right
bank) inlet is CMP, which indicates that this too was pieced together from separate sections. This crossing
conveys the stream under a second small, seldom used logging access route.
5. Proposed Mitigation Actions
The mitigation proposal is to replace Culverts #1 and #2 with fish-passable crossings. These will most likely be
either stream simulation design culverts or pre-fabricated concrete slab bridges on concrete abutments. All
crossings will be designed to meet fish passage criterial set by ODFW and standards outlined in the Standard
Local Operating Procedures for Endangered Species (SLOPES) as administered by the National Marine Fisheries
Service. The latter standard requires replacement crossings include a span that is 1.5 times the active channel
width of the stream .The crossing structure will be based on engineering and hydraulic analysis with
DATE: May 19, 2020 FROM: John Macklin
TO: Ken Loffink and Jim Brick SUBJECT: Fish Screen Waiver: Draft Mitigation
Plan
Page 4
parameters considered including load ratings suitable for intended uses, a no-rise floodplain condition, scour
and scour protection, and fish passage standards as noted above.
In addition, up to 20 pieces of large woody debris will be placed in this stream reach to improve habitat. This
will consist of “key pieces” that are 24 feet or more in length and 16 inches or more in diameter, and will
include several larger diameter logs with root wads attached. In addition, smaller trees that are removed in the
course of culvert replacement may be placed in the stream.
6. Post-Construction Conditions
After construction, an additional 2,100 linear feet and approximately 25,000 square feet of stream habitat will
become accessible to native migratory fish entering from Gales Creek. Culvert #3 (Figure 2) will form the upper
limit of migratory fish passage. The additional large woody debris will improve habitat by retaining bedload
and initiate localized scour. These drivers will encourage the development of additional gravel deposits
suitable for salmonid spawning, and create habitat complexity that will benefit rearing juvenile salmonids.
7. Benefit Assessment Summary
As detailed in a February 18, 2020 DEA mitigation assessment memorandum, restoration of fish passage at the
two culverts is estimated to result in production and emergence of 31,500 steelhead fry, and 38,475 coho fry if
the available habitat were to be fully occupied by spawners. At this rate, steelhead and coho would need to
utilize only 6% and 14%, respectively, of the existing spawning habitat made accessible by the project to fully
compensate for the maximum potential mortality caused by water withdrawal at the maximum permit
pumping rate. (Although not specifically addressed here, the restoration of fish passage would also fully
compensate for the maximum potential mortality caused by water withdrawal at the capacity pumping rate.)
8. References
DEA 2020. Fish Screen Mitigation by Bateman Creek Culvert Removal. Technical memorandum prepared for
GSI Water Solutions and Joint Water Commission.
MHE 2019a. Spring Hill Pumping Plant Fish Entrainment Monitoring, Tualatin River, Oregon. Technical Report
prepared for the Joint Water Commission and Barney Reservoir Joint Ownership Commission, Mount Hood
